-- Text messages between a part-time New England Patriots employee and an equipment assistant with talk of cash, free shoes and autographs.

-- The part-time employee -- a locker room attendant responsible for 12 footballs before the AFC title game -- spending 100 seconds in a bathroom after game officials had approved the balls for play.

-- Measurements taken at halftime after a team that is losing tips off the league about footballs that appear to be too soft.

-- The Patriots' star quarterback and the equipment assistant suddenly exchanging phone calls in the days just after news of underinflated footballs blew up.

Those are the key points in the 139-page NFL-commissioned report given to the league's brass.

The Patriots beat the Colts 45-7 in the January 18 AFC title game and went on to win the Super Bowl. Controversy swirled after the Colts raised concerns that the footballs used solely by the Patriots' offense in the first half were underinflated.

Report points finger at QB Tom Brady
The report, prepared by attorney Ted Wells, found that "it is more probable than not" that Patriots quarterback Tom Brady was "at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities" of locker room attendant Jim McNally and equipment assistant John Jastremski, who has been with the team since 2001.

The report also found that "it is more probable than not" that McNally and Jastremski "participated in a deliberate effort to release air from Patriots game balls after the balls were examined by the referee" in violation of NFL rules in the AFC Championship.

"Based on the evidence, it also is our view that it is more probable than not that Tom Brady ... was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities ... involving the release of air from Patriots game balls," Wells wrote.

The repeated use of the phrase "more probable than not" sparked immediate social media sarcasm, with one NFL fan writing on Twitter: "I have concluded that it is more probable than not that I will continue to not give a crap about Deflategate."

It also prompted a radio sports host in Boston to tweet, "It is more probable than not that the Wells Investigation was a complete waste of time."

The report said there was no evidence that any other Patriots player or staffer was involved, adding specifically that investigators do not believe coach Bill Belichick, any other coach or the team's ownership took part in or knew of any wrongdoing.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said that Troy Vincent, the league's executive vice president of football operations, will decide on possible penalties and if the game-day process for delivering footballs to the field needs to be changed.

The evidence against Brady, a future Hall of Famer and a marquee player in the NFL, is largely circumstantial. He told investigators that he had no involvement and no knowledge of a plan to deflate footballs that would be used by the Patriots before the AFC title game.

But the report said his claims were not plausible and contradicted by other evidence. He also refused to turn over his cell phone.

Angry text
The evidence linking Brady to the controversy includes texts where McNally and Jastremski discuss the quarterback and his air pressure preference that would affect the feel and ability to grip the football.

For instance, Brady was apparently upset after the balls used in an October game against the New York Jets (each team provided the balls used by its offense) had too much air in them. His criticism upset McNally.

McNally: Tom sucks...im going make that next ball a (expletive) balloon

Jastremski: Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done...

Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though...

Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn... The refs (expletive) us...a few of then were at almost 16

New England won the game 27-25 and Brady completed just 20 of 37 passes.

In another text message sent before the season started, McNally calls himself the "deflator" and tells Jastremski that he needs some new shoes. Eleven days before the AFC championship game, McNally texts the equipment assistant and reminds him to have Brady autograph two footballs and to get him some shoes.

Below the minimum pressure
Brady completed 23 of 35 passes in the AFC championship game. Three passes were for touchdowns and one was intercepted.

Before the game, McNally brought the Patriots' footballs to referee Walt Anderson, who determined all but two of the balls were properly inflated. They were adjusted, but when the official looked for the balls before heading to the field, they were missing.

Surveillance video showed that McNally had taken the Patriots' and Colts' balls -- in violation of NFL procedure -- to a bathroom and was in there for one minute, 40 seconds. McNally then took the balls to the field.

The Patriots took a 14-0 lead before one of Brady's passes was picked off.

The report said that after the interception, a Colts equipment staff member measured the air pressure of the ball, one of the Patriots' game balls, and told a game official and NFL personnel that the ball was below the 12.5 pounds per square inch minimum measurement.

At halftime, the alternate game officials measured the pressure in 11 of the Patriots' 12 game balls and four provided by the Colts. The two sets of measurements differed by about fourth-tenths of one pound, but none of the 11 Patriots balls met the minimum standard.

The Patriots have said environmental factors such as cold temperatures led to the loss of pressure in the balls. The temperature at the stadium in Foxborough, Massachusetts, when the game began was around 50 degrees.

The report also found that three of the four Colts' balls tested were underinflated when measured by one alternate official. The balls were 12.5 PSI or above when tested by the other official.

News of the Deflategate controversy was first reported on Twitter during the game by longtime Indianapolis sports columnist Bob Kravitz.

Investigators found Brady and Jastremski spoke on the phone six times over the next three days. The quarterback also sent text messages "seemingly designed to calm Jastremski ('You good Jonny boy?'; 'You doing good?')," according to the report, which added the two hadn't corresponded during the previous six months.

Investigators said the phone exchanges were evidence of Brady's awareness to the scheme.

Patriots disappointed
Patriots owner Robert Kraft was defiant in response to Wednesday's report, saying he was disappointed in the findings and still believed the team did nothing to violate NFL rules.

Kraft criticized what he called "inferences from circumstantial evidence," adding that "the time, effort and resources expended to reach this conclusion are incomprehensible to me."

"To say we are disappointed in its findings, which do not include any incontrovertible or hard evidence of deliberate deflation of footballs at the AFC Championship Game, would be a gross understatement," Kraft said.

Brady denied knowledge of tampering with footballs during his interview with investigators, according to the report. He answered questions voluntarily but declined to make available communications, including texts and emails, the report said.

Brady made the same denial to reporters on January 22, days after the game.

"I didn't alter the ball in any way. I have no knowledge of wrongdoing," Brady said.

He has not commented on the findings of the report.

"Likely" knew? Bullshit. Even if he wasn't in on what happened before the balls made it to the field, it doesn't take a professional football player to feel a 2 psi difference.

Rollyn01

05-07-2015, 04:29 PM

"Likely" knew? Bullshit. Even if he wasn't in on what happened before the balls made it to the field, it doesn't take a professional football player to feel a 2 psi difference.

Don't you mean a professional referee? I would think that with all on the handling of the ball by the refs, they themselves would have been able to tell whether the footballs were underinflated or not. Hell, I would think they would be able to tell the status of the ball just by the way it bounces when it hits the ground. "Hey, something doesn't look right about the way the ball is bouncing down the field. It's not bouncing high enough or far enough. I wannna check that out real quick."

Bos Mutus

05-07-2015, 04:33 PM

"Likely" knew? Bullshit. Even if he wasn't in on what happened before the balls made it to the field, it doesn't take a professional football player to feel a 2 psi difference.

There is absolutely NO way that an equipment manager messes with the footballs without the QB being in on it.

Brady needs a 6-8 game suspension.

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 04:39 PM

"Likely" knew? Bullshit. Even if he wasn't in on what happened before the balls made it to the field, it doesn't take a professional football player to feel a 2 psi difference.

I wonder why Andrew Luck didn't notice/say something. He had to have realized it as well.

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 04:43 PM

Brady doesn't give a shit, really. He's banging a supermodel. He went to the Kentucky Derby, then flew on a private jet to the Mayweather fight. Add to that the fact that he plays for a team on in the East, which means he has the media behind him anyway.

He's a cheater, just like everyone else in the game is a cheater. Baseball pitchers scuff the ball. Basketball players carry the ball regularly, as well as grab jerseys of guys they are defending. They all cheat. Sometimes they get caught, sometimes they don't.

Bos Mutus

05-07-2015, 04:50 PM

I wonder why Andrew Luck didn't notice/say something. He had to have realized it as well.

Something I never realized until this all happened....each team has their own balls.

That's why it didn't get noticed until someone from the Colts intercepted the Patriots' ball

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 04:55 PM

Something I never realized until this all happened....each team has their own balls.

That's why it didn't get noticed until someone from the Colts intercepted the Patriots' ball

Right...forgot about that...thanks.

Makes me wonder why they don't just share the same balls. I know QBs are prima donnas and an 1/8PSI makes all the difference but, if they are as good as they get paid to be, they should be able to play with any ball that is within regs and still be successful. So share game balls, just as the other sports do.

Rusty Jones

05-07-2015, 05:10 PM

I wonder why Andrew Luck didn't notice/say something. He had to have realized it as well.

How would a quarterback know anything about the other team's ball? The way for the other team to find out is by catching an interception or recovering a fumble. D'Qwell Jackson is the one that caught the interception and reported it.

The ONLY argument that Brady has going for him - and it's a very weak one - is that he'd have presume that he'd never throw an interception or that his team would never fumble the ball before making a decision to deflate it; while hoping that they believe he is rational enough to know better than to do it after taking that into consideration.

Rusty Jones

05-07-2015, 05:14 PM

Right...forgot about that...thanks.

Makes me wonder why they don't just share the same balls. I know QBs are prima donnas and an 1/8PSI makes all the difference but, if they are as good as they get paid to be, they should be able to play with any ball that is within regs and still be successful. So share game balls, just as the other sports do.

That logic doesn't fly. What makes football different from other sports is that the ball doesn't frequently change hands between teams on a continuous basis. This makes footballs more analogous to baseball bats than to balls of other sports.

Bos Mutus

05-07-2015, 05:15 PM

Right...forgot about that...thanks.

Makes me wonder why they don't just share the same balls. I know QBs are prima donnas and an 1/8PSI makes all the difference but, if they are as good as they get paid to be, they should be able to play with any ball that is within regs and still be successful. So share game balls, just as the other sports do.

Seems simple enough...standard balls. Just not the NFL way, I guess. Brady was among the people to lobby the NFL back in 2006 to let the teams control their own balls...there's apparently a whole lot to it, too...they prepare them days and weeks in advance:

In 2013 the New York Times did a fascinating story (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/24/sports/football/eli-mannings-footballs-are-months-in-making.html)talking about the process in which the Giants prepare balls for quarterback Eli Manning (http://forums.militarytimes.com/nfl/players/6760/), so they’re to his liking. It takes months. According to the Times story, the balls are rubbed vigorously for 45 minutes to remove the wax and darken the leather (new balls are too slick, quarterbacks will say). The Giants soak the ball with a wet towel. Then it is brushed again. Then it’s off to an electric spin wheel for more scrubbing. Then the process is repeated twice more. They practice with those balls to break them in even further, and then the ones deemed fit for games are protected like the president.

“No one is allowed to touch those balls,” team’s equipment director Joe Skiba told the Times. “They’re precious jewels. Too much work has gone into them.”
Quarterbacks are particular about the footballs they use. In 2006, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady (http://forums.militarytimes.com/nfl/players/5228/) teamed up to lobby the NFL competition committee (http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2006-11-28/sports/0611270475_1_new-football-new-england-quarterback-competition-committee)to allow each team to provide its own footballs for games, so they could be to the quarterbacks’ liking. Home teams provided all the balls before that, and quarterbacks didn’t like the differences in the balls for each road game. The committee passed it, and now each team provides 12 balls for officials to inspect two hours and 15 minutes before the game.
Although much has been made of the edges that teams can get by deflating footballs (it can make them easier to grip and catch), Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers (http://forums.militarytimes.com/nfl/players/7200/) prefers the opposite. CBS’ Phil Simms said during a Packers broadcast (via CSNNE.com (http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/rodgers-told-cbs-he-tries-overinflate-footballs)) that he prefers his footballs be over-inflated, and he’ll even push the NFL rules on it. Game balls are, by rule, to be inflated with 12.5 to 13.5 pounds of air per square inch and weigh 14 to 15 ounces.

“(Rodgers) said something [that] was unique,” Simms said on CBS, via CSNNE. "[Rodgers said] 'I like to push the limit to how much air we can put in the football, even go over what they allow you to do and see if the officials take air out of it.' Because he thinks it’s easier for him to grip. He likes them tight.”
Are various tricks to break in footballs considered cheating? There have been stories of quarterbacks and kickers putting footballs in the dryer since field goals were invented, sometimes with a wet towel or fabric softener, to break them in.

There hasn't been much of an outrage from many former and current players about this story. Shaun King, a former NFL quarterback who works for Yahoo, said the whole deflate-gate isn’t a big deal. Every quarterback, he said, will do things to break in their footballs.

“Every quarterback does whatever they deem necessary to have their balls the way they like them,” King said. “This is a pure witch hunt the NFL and sports media is on.”
Former NFL quarterback Matt Leinart (http://forums.militarytimes.com/nfl/players/7759/) agreed that the whole story is no big deal, on his Twitter account.

Every team tampers with the footballs. Ask any Qb In the league, this is ridiculous!!
— Matt Leinart (@MattLeinartQB) January 21, 2015 (https://twitter.com/MattLeinartQB/status/557943575585882112)
Actually my guy @kurt13warner (https://twitter.com/kurt13warner) didn't tamper w the footballs because he wore gloves. Used to irritate me..So correction, almost all QBs! Lol
— Matt Leinart (@MattLeinartQB) January 21, 2015 (https://twitter.com/MattLeinartQB/status/557952602218844160)Former NFL quarterback Tim Hasselbeck, who works with ESPN, shared that sentiment.

QB's are picky about fb's and could tell you everything about their game balls. broken in to their liking. how it works. period.
— tim hasselbeck (@tthasselbeck) January 21, 2015 (https://twitter.com/tthasselbeck/status/557907334014722048)
coaches, refs, average fan wouldn't be able to tell the difference by holding them.
— tim hasselbeck (@tthasselbeck) January 21, 2015 (https://twitter.com/tthasselbeck/status/557907655445204993)Former Tampa Bay Buccaneers (http://forums.militarytimes.com/nfl/teams/tam/) quarterback Brad Johnson bribed someone to scuff the footballs (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/reminder--brad-johnson-paid-for-super-bowl-footballs-to-be-doctored-142642094.html)before the Super Bowl in 2003. Each Super Bowl has a new batch of balls with the Super Bowl logo on them. Is that cheating, or is it more in line with what Eli Manning and the Giants do, breaking in balls? Or is this all much ado about nothing, and the Patriots are in a firestorm even though everyone in the NFL manipulates game balls in some way? There’s a long culture in baseball of pitchers putting goodness knows what (http://deadspin.com/a-major-league-pitchers-guide-to-doctoring-a-baseball-1562307090) on the balls, and only the most egregious violators are ever called out on it. But if it was so common, would the Colts – who got word (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/how-did-colts-find-out-about-deflate-gate--and-gronk-takes-blame-144407663.html)from linebacker D’Qwell Jackson to an equipment manager to coach Chuck Pagano to general manager Ryan Grigson in the press box to NFL director of football operations Mike Kensil to the officials at halftime – be so upset as to call the Patriots out on it?

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 05:16 PM

How would a quarterback know anything about the other team's ball? The way for the other team to find out is by catching an interception or recovering a fumble. D'Qwell Jackson is the one that caught the interception and reported it. Yes, that was already pointed out above.

The ONLY argument that Brady has going for him - and it's a very weak one - is that he'd have presume that he'd never throw an interception or that his team would never fumble the ball before making a decision to deflate it; while hoping that they believe he is rational enough to know better than to do it after taking that into consideration.Brady is a douche. I can't stand him, or his type. He cheated, no doubt. I just don't care. The media has a way of trying to knock people from the top. For what purpose? Jealousy. It always turns into a witch hunt, whether it's Brady, Bonds, Tiger, or anyone else at the top of their game. The only reason people care is because they want an excuse as to why that other person is more successful than them.

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 05:20 PM

Seems simple enough...standard balls. Just not the NFL way, I guess. Brady was among the people to lobby the NFL back in 2006 to let the teams control their own balls...there's apparently a whole lot to it, too...they prepare them days and weeks in advance:

Just seems crazy. Home team should provide them. When a baseball pitcher goes on the road, he has to pitch off of a mound he's not comfortable with. Hell, home teams design their baseball parks to favor their specific hitters/pitchers. It's all cheating. Football, as far as I know, is the only sport that allows the road team a certain advantage (footballs). There's even special teams balls that the kickers use to get more distance (slightly more air).

Either way, Brady is bangin' a hotty tonight...that bastard.

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 05:21 PM

That logic doesn't fly. What makes football different from other sports is that the ball doesn't frequently change hands between teams on a continuous basis. This makes footballs more analogous to baseball bats than to balls of other sports.

In high school, they all use the same ball. In college, they all use the same ball. The only reason the NFL doesn't do it that way is because points equals money and the more comfortable the QB is with a ball, the more points are scored.

Rusty Jones

05-07-2015, 05:23 PM

Yes, that was already pointed out above.

Brady is a douche. I can't stand him, or his type. He cheated, no doubt. I just don't care. The media has a way of trying to knock people from the top. For what purpose? Jealousy. It always turns into a witch hunt, whether it's Brady, Bonds, Tiger, or anyone else at the top of their game. The only reason people care is because they want an excuse as to why that other person is more successful than them.

So are you a Floyd Mayweather fan? Because you sound like one right now.

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 05:28 PM

So are you a Floyd Mayweather fan? Because you sound like one right now.What?? I have no idea where you're going with this.

Rusty Jones

05-07-2015, 05:33 PM

What?? I have no idea where you're going with this.

What you just said is almost exactly what Mayweather fans say when defending him.

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 05:41 PM

What you just said is almost exactly what Mayweather fans say when defending him.

Ok.

I'm indifferent to boxing in general, just as I am with MMA. The last boxing match I watched was either Leonard vs Hagler or Tyson vs Holyfield, whichever came last. From what I hear I probably wouldn't like Mayweather because he's a defensive fighter and that seems pretty boring.

I've said this before...I take no personal interest in the athletes/teams I support, the actors in the movies I like, musicians in the bands I like, etc. If I did, there wouldn't be anything I could do related to pop culture.

Rusty Jones

05-07-2015, 05:43 PM

Yes, that was already pointed out above.

Brady is a douche. I can't stand him, or his type. He cheated, no doubt. I just don't care. The media has a way of trying to knock people from the top. For what purpose? Jealousy. It always turns into a witch hunt, whether it's Brady, Bonds, Tiger, or anyone else at the top of their game. The only reason people care is because they want an excuse as to why that other person is more successful than them.

To a certain extent, I don't have much of a problem with this - even if it's done for its own sake. You're a Christian, so I'm sure you're familiar with both the Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican, and the Parable of the Lowest Seat. What they both have in common is that Jesus ended them with "whoever exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."

Couldn't be further from the truth as Jesus, the most worshipped man in the world, was a homeless man who was born in a barn. But people like Brady and Mayweather? Well, they get to be on the opposite end of that moral to the stories.

sandsjames

05-07-2015, 05:54 PM

To a certain extent, I don't have much of a problem with this - even if it's done for its own sake. You're a Christian, so I'm sure you're familiar with both the Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican, and the Parable of the Lowest Seat. What they both have in common is that Jesus ended them with "whoever exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."

Couldn't be further from the truth as Jesus, the most worshipped man in the world, was a homeless man who was born in a barn. But people like Brady and Mayweather? Well, they get to be on the opposite end of that moral to the stories.

I'm lost. I'm not sure whether you are agreeing with me, whether you are being defensive about something, or if you are trying to instigate something.

TJMAC77SP

05-08-2015, 01:00 AM

Yeah, those deflated balls are the reason the Pats won the AFC Championship...................................... .oh wait.

All this hate reminds me of my fellow Red Sox fans when the Yankees are mentioned.

"The only reason they have won so many world series because they bought them (no salary cap)."

We BOSOX fans are full of shit too.

I have authored and written many Reports of Investigation. As they go, that one is a stinker.

Seems about right to me...probably gets reduced on appeal or something though.

I hear many saying that the "more probable than not" statement isn't enough evidence to do anything. However, this isn't a criminal case. The CBA mentions things about tarnishing the image of the league, etc, which this falls into.

Now, I won't compare it to other cases (drugs, abuse, etc) because this is not nearly as important as those so, as a case on it's own, I think the punishment is just about right on.

TJMAC77SP

05-12-2015, 03:33 PM

I hear many saying that the "more probable than not" statement isn't enough evidence to do anything. However, this isn't a criminal case. The CBA mentions things about tarnishing the image of the league, etc, which this falls into.

Now, I won't compare it to other cases (drugs, abuse, etc) because this is not nearly as important as those so, as a case on it's own, I think the punishment is just about right on.

I doubt this conclusion would be the same in a civil action either. There doesn't seem to be a preponderance of evidence that supports the allegations that it was "more probable than not"...that Brady..."was at least generally aware" of the activities of other Patriots employees

I am not comfortable tarnishing the reputation of a man permanently based on a flawed investigation during which misleading details were leaked which contributed to this general acceptance by the public and in which the conclusions drawn are actually nothing more than guesses.

sandsjames

05-12-2015, 03:41 PM

I am not comfortable tarnishing the reputation of a man permanently based on a flawed investigation during which misleading details were leaked which contributed to this general acceptance by the public and in which the conclusions drawn are actually nothing more than guesses.

His reputation isn't tarnished by this. Those who hate him were going to hate him whether he was suspended or not. Same goes for those who love him. This has solely to do with the reputation of the NFL commissioner's office.

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 04:13 PM

I doubt this conclusion would be the same in a civil action either. There doesn't seem to be a preponderance of evidence that supports the allegations that it was "more probable than not"...that Brady..."was at least generally aware" of the activities of other Patriots employees

"More probable than not" is another way of saying "preponderance of the evidence"...both mean about the same...51% chance he knew of this. That is the standard for civil court, as well.

I am not comfortable tarnishing the reputation of a man permanently based on a flawed investigation during which misleading details were leaked which contributed to this general acceptance by the public and in which the conclusions drawn are actually nothing more than guesses.

Common sense, really. There is no way those guys mess with footballs without the quarterback knowing about it.

Is it possible that he just sort of shows them how he likes it, not knowing it is below the legal limit? Yes, I suppose so...but his text messages and phone calls kind of put the suspicion over the top.

This isn't like cheating in a high school game, the NFL is a multi-million dollar enterprise that depends on integrity.

hustonj

05-12-2015, 04:27 PM

"More probable than not" is another way of saying "preponderance of the evidence"...both mean about the same...51% chance he knew of this. That is the standard for civil court, as well.

Uh, but they do NOT mean the same.

"Preponderance of the evidence" explicitly identifies that there IS evidence, and that the majority of it point towards the conclusion being reached. Even with this statement, you need to show the evidence, and support that the statement is valid. Simply making the statement without supporting it is providing an unsupported opinion.

"More probably than not" is an unsupported statement of opinion, and nothing more. Nothing provided in the coverage of the report supports this opinion as having basis in fact, though it obviously has a basis in popular opinion. Heck, other language provided in the coverage of the report seems to clearly indicate that there is no evidence, simply the assumption that it was impossible for him not to have known.

Honestly, I don't care about the issue under discussion. I do care that people are assigning GUILT despite a lack of anything more than suspicion and expectations.

This isn't like cheating in a high school game, the NFL is a multi-million dollar enterprise that depends on integrity.

The NFL doesn't depend on integrity AT ALL. It depends on revenue. Revenue is generated by advertising dollars, merchandising, and ticket sales. This "conspiracy" is getting air time because it is generating revenue (for the sports and news networks, primarily), not because it is actually newsworthy. As this"conspiracy" polarizes fans, that polarization will create merchandizing opportunities supporting the opposite viewpoints. Actual integrity wouldn't generate those merchandizing opportunities.

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 04:38 PM

His reputation isn't tarnished by this.

It is for me.

Those who hate him were going to hate him whether he was suspended or not.

I might have "hated" him in a competitive sense, but at least respected him.

Same goes for those who love him. This has solely to do with the reputation of the NFL commissioner's office.

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 04:50 PM

Uh, but they do NOT mean the same.

Uh...you're mistaken.

"Preponderance of the evidence" explicitly identifies that there IS evidence, and that the majority of it point towards the conclusion being reached. Even with this statement, you need to show the evidence, and support that the statement is valid. Simply making the statement without supporting it is providing an unsupported opinion.

"More probably than not" is an unsupported statement of opinion, and nothing more. Nothing provided in the coverage of the report supports this opinion as having basis in fact, though it obviously has a basis in popular opinion. Heck, other language provided in the coverage of the report seems to clearly indicate that there is no evidence, simply the assumption that it was impossible for him not to have known.

The legal dictionary disagrees with you:

A preponderance of evidence has been described as just enough evidence to make it more likely than not that the fact the claimant seeks to prove is true.

Honestly, I don't care about the issue under discussion. I do care that people are assigning GUILT despite a lack of anything more than suspicion and expectations.

They have more than that...it seems you didn't care enough about the issue to have read about it.

The NFL doesn't depend on integrity AT ALL. It depends on revenue. Revenue is generated by advertising dollars, merchandising, and ticket sales. This "conspiracy" is getting air time because it is generating revenue (for the sports and news networks, primarily), not because it is actually newsworthy. As this"conspiracy" polarizes fans, that polarization will create merchandizing opportunities supporting the opposite viewpoints. Actual integrity wouldn't generate those merchandizing opportunities.

I'm sure the NFL would be happy to just make the money without having to worry about integirty...but, I believe that they believe the integrity of the game is critical to their revenue-generating ability. They are probably right about that.

sandsjames

05-12-2015, 04:51 PM

It is for me.

I might have "hated" him in a competitive sense, but at least respected him.

You better start making a list, then, of every athlete you "respect" and begin marking them off one by one.

Let's also not get hung up on the "more probable than not" and leave it at that. If you continue reading, it says "more probable than not that he MAY have had SOME knowledge".

To clarify, once again...He cheated, there is no doubt in my mind about that. I'm not defending him. I just don't care.

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 05:01 PM

You better start making a list, then, of every athlete you "respect" and begin marking them off one by one.

Why would I have to do that?

Let's also not get hung up on the "more probable than not" and leave it at that. If you continue reading, it says "more probable than not that he MAY have had SOME knowledge".

To clarify, once again...He cheated, there is no doubt in my mind about that. I'm not defending him.

I'm not really hung up on the words...regardless of the words the NFL used...I also have no doubt he cheated. Which is why I think the punishment is about right.

I just don't care.

It's not keeping me up at night or anything...but, I care enough to have formed an opinion that he cheated and the punishment is about right.

I also think it'll probably get reduced on appeal

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 05:28 PM

The lead up:

On May 9, 2014, before the start of the season:
McNally: You working
Jastremski: Yup
McNally: Nice dude....jimmy needs some kicks....lets make a deal.....come on help the deflator

This is preseason...seems at least the equipment guys were already all about deflating.

On October 17, 2014, after Brady complained about the ball inflation after a game versus the Jets:
McNally: Tom sucks...im going make that next ball a f------ balloon
Jastremski: Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done...
Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though...
Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn... The refs f----- us...a few of then were at almost 16
Jastremski: They didnt recheck then after they put air in them
McNally: F---- tom ...16 is nothing...wait till next sunday

Something funny going on...what is so stressful about taking care of footballs..."getting them done"?...Oh, maybe running them into a bathroom after the ref checks them to illegally deflate them? Yeah, that might be stressful...Brady knows it is.

More chitter chatter about inflation levels on footballs, so this isn't about anything else.

On October 21, 2014:
McNally: Make sure you blow up the ball to look like a rugby ball so tom can get used to it before sunday
Jastremski: Omg

They talk more about inflation level.

On October 23, 2014:
Jastremski: Can't wait to give you your needle this week :)
McNally: F--- tom....make sure the pump is attached to the needle.....f------ watermelons coming
Jastremski: So angry
McNally: The only thing deflating sun..is his passing rating

References to brady...and deflation. Seems like these guys are getting a lot of pressure from someone named Tom.

On October 24, 2014:
Jastremski: I have a big needle for u this week
McNally: Better be surrounded by cash and newkicks....or its a rugby sunday
McNally: F--- tom
Jastremski: Maybe u will have some nice size 11s in ur locker
McNally: Tom must really be working your balls hard this week

Is is funny how much these guys get pissed at Brady for having him do all this.

On January 7, 2015, eleven days before the AFC Championship Game:
McNally: Remember to put a couple sweet pig skins ready for tom to sign
Jastremski: U got it kid...big autograph day for you
McNally: Nice throw some kicks in and make it real special
Jastremski: It ur lucky. 11?
McNally: 11 or 11 and half kid

11 or 11 and half?...boy, that's funny stuff. At least Brady was thanking them with shoes and autographs

This is all BEFORE the scandal broke...then there is a flurry of activity after the scandal breaks....but, if anyone doesn't think this stuff alone makes i more like than not (a preponderance of evidence), that these guys were messing with the balls and Brady was not only in on it, but insisting on it...then you're just too big of a fan to look at this objectively.

sandsjames

05-12-2015, 06:34 PM

The lead up:

This is preseason...seems at least the equipment guys were already all about deflating.

Something funny going on...what is so stressful about taking care of footballs..."getting them done"?...Oh, maybe running them into a bathroom after the ref checks them to illegally deflate them? Yeah, that might be stressful...Brady knows it is.

More chitter chatter about inflation levels on footballs, so this isn't about anything else.

They talk more about inflation level.

References to brady...and deflation. Seems like these guys are getting a lot of pressure from someone named Tom.

Is is funny how much these guys get pissed at Brady for having him do all this.

11 or 11 and half?...boy, that's funny stuff. At least Brady was thanking them with shoes and autographs

This is all BEFORE the scandal broke...then there is a flurry of activity after the scandal breaks....but, if anyone doesn't think this stuff alone makes i more like than not (a preponderance of evidence), that these guys were messing with the balls and Brady was not only in on it, but insisting on it...then you're just too big of a fan to look at this objectively.

I will preface again by saying that I know he cheated. However, I'm no lawyer, but those show nothing.

This would be my defense:

It mentions deflating, but it never mentions deflating to an illegal level. It actually sounds to me like the ball boys were over inflating and Brady bitched about it, saying "don't over inflate". The ball boys then get pissed of at him for bitching and decide to deflate them extra just to fuck with him, to prove a point.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)

05-12-2015, 06:48 PM

People pay thousands of dollars to see these games in person, and for what, to know that the game can somehow be won because players knowingly and deliberately cheated? Why should this lack of integrity be tolerated for one second? Why in the world should any player who violated the trust (and hard earned money) of the fans be allowed to continue to play? I say ban Brady for life, end of discussion. You cheat in your job, you lose your job. You cheat in school, you get expelled. You cheat on your wife, you lose your wife. Doesn't matter where you cheat, the penalty should be severe enough to deter future cheaters.

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 06:50 PM

I will preface again by saying that I know he cheated. However, I'm no lawyer, but those show nothing.

This would be my defense:

It mentions deflating, but it never mentions deflating to an illegal level. It actually sounds to me like the ball boys were over inflating and Brady bitched about it, saying "don't over inflate". The ball boys then get pissed of at him for bitching and decide to deflate them extra just to fuck with him, to prove a point.

I disagree that it shows nothing.
1) It shows there is considerable attention to the inflation level of footballs
2) It shows that Tom Brady was knowledegeable and directing it.
3) It shows they were a little nervous, stressed and pissed about it.

#3 doesn't make sense if it wasn't to an illegal level.

Again...this is just the before the scandal crap...remember again, they had a video of the guy taking the balls into the bathroom after the referee had inspected them...again, an action that makes no sense were they not knowingly doing something outside the legal limits.

...and then, don't forget that what 10 or 11 of those 12 footballs caught after the fact and were, in fact, illegally deflated. There is not just "suspicion that the balls were illegally deflated"...they were. How they got there is by the guy going into the bathroom with them...this is known.

The only "suspicion" issue is whether or not Tom Brady knew about it...and I think there can be little doubt of that from an objective look at this.

sandsjames

05-12-2015, 07:05 PM

I disagree that it shows nothing.
1) It shows there is considerable attention to the inflation level of footballs
2) It shows that Tom Brady was knowledegeable and directing it.
3) It shows they were a little nervous, stressed and pissed about it.

#3 doesn't make sense if it wasn't to an illegal level.

Again...this is just the before the scandal crap...remember again, they had a video of the guy taking the balls into the bathroom after the referee had inspected them...again, an action that makes no sense were they not knowingly doing something outside the legal limits.

...and then, don't forget that what 10 or 11 of those 12 footballs caught after the fact and were, in fact, illegally deflated. There is not just "suspicion that the balls were illegally deflated"...they were. How they got there is by the guy going into the bathroom with them...this is known.

The only "suspicion" issue is whether or not Tom Brady knew about it...and I think there can be little doubt of that from an objective look at this.

I have no reason to not be objective on this. I absolutely believe he knew what was going on. I just don't think that this evidence shows that.

At most, it sounds like some vindictive ball boys didn't like being bitched out about doing their job by pretty boy Tom so they tried to hurt his performance by deflating the balls to an extremely low point.

sandsjames

05-12-2015, 07:09 PM

People pay thousands of dollars to see these games in person, and for what, to know that the game can somehow be won because players knowingly and deliberately cheated? Why should this lack of integrity be tolerated for one second? Why in the world should any player who violated the trust (and hard earned money) of the fans be allowed to continue to play? I say ban Brady for life, end of discussion. You cheat in your job, you lose your job. You cheat in school, you get expelled. You cheat on your wife, you lose your wife. Doesn't matter where you cheat, the penalty should be severe enough to deter future cheaters.

It's football. It's not life or death. People spending thousands is up to them. If they start suspending players for life for cheating then it's gonna be a pathetic sport to watch because all the "good" players will be banned. How many players have been caught with cleats on their shoes being a little bit longer than allowed? How many players put Vaseline on their uniforms to make it harder to tackle. How many where sticky gloves to catch the ball. It's all cheating. Every bit of it. Yet people continue to turn a blind eye to what we all know is happening, until it becomes one of the big names.

For you to compare this to cheating on a spouse, or in school, is laughable. I'm sorry you place athletes on such a pedestal.

sandsjames

05-12-2015, 07:11 PM

Why would I have to do that?

Because they all cheat, 'til they get caught.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)

05-12-2015, 07:21 PM

For you to compare this to cheating on a spouse, or in school, is laughable.

Laughable? Both scenarios will cost someone lots of money, whether through a divorce or Vegas bets. Why bother even going to a game if proven cheaters continue to get a free pass?

sandsjames

05-12-2015, 07:32 PM

Why bother even going to a game if proven cheaters continue to get a free pass?Exactly...why bother? I agree completely. But people WILL keep going, fully knowing that it's happening. It's the entertainment business. And I'll continue to overpay for "Sunday Ticket" so I can watch all the games.

Maybe it's just hard for me to worry about the "cheating" aspect when most of it is perfectly acceptable within the confines of the game:

Offensive holding probably gets called about 20% of the time, which means that 80% of the time they are all cheating and not getting caught. Pass interference, offensive and defensive, happens almost every play but rarely gets called. That means that the majority of the time it is acceptable cheating. Players will lay on the ground after a hard, high, hit to fool the refs into thinking they took a hit to the head in order to get a free 15 yards or possibly an ejection of the other player. It's cheating. Yet I don't hear any complaints that those people should be banned for life.

So I guess it's only a serious offense when it's an uncommon one?

TJMAC77SP

05-12-2015, 07:58 PM

His reputation isn't tarnished by this. Those who hate him were going to hate him whether he was suspended or not. Same goes for those who love him. This has solely to do with the reputation of the NFL commissioner's office.

I suppose you have a point since I first saw people posting on line about both positions before a single investigative action was taken.

TJMAC77SP

05-12-2015, 08:41 PM

"More probable than not" is another way of saying "preponderance of the evidence"...both mean about the same...51% chance he knew of this. That is the standard for civil court, as well.

Common sense, really. There is no way those guys mess with footballs without the quarterback knowing about it.

Is it possible that he just sort of shows them how he likes it, not knowing it is below the legal limit? Yes, I suppose so...but his text messages and phone calls kind of put the suspicion over the top.

This isn't like cheating in a high school game, the NFL is a multi-million dollar enterprise that depends on integrity.

No, actually 'more probably than not' is a term they placed into the investigation. It is an opinion which is not fully supported by facts uncovered by the investigation. There is little doubt for example that McNally and Jastremski altered the ball pressure. There is no doubt that Brady likes the balls inflated at the low end of the allowable spectrum and has harangued the two Patriots employees about that but there is no evidence that he knowingly directed or allowed them to put the pressure below the allowable limit. On at least one occasion Jastremski complained to McNally that the refs had altered the ball pressure to almost 16 psi. "I checked some of the balls this morn... The refsfucked us...a few of then were at almost 16". I can image that this would elicit some strong reaction from Brady. That is a very reasonable alternative explanation for the anger imtimated to by McNally and Jastremski.

I am not sure which texts and calls from Brady you are referring to because I have seen none that support that statement (or the conclusion of the investigators). One of the leaks which came out early was Brady's refusal to turn over his personal cell phone to the investigators. That was probably the smartest move made by anyone involved in this fiasco. Given who Brady is and who he is married to and the constant attention paid to every little thing in his life if I were him the last thing I would do is turn over my personal cell phone and it's contents (to include private texts and photos). The assurance of privacy given by the investigators was useless. Given the swiss cheese nature of this and past investigations I don't blame Brady for not turning the phone over. Add to that the fact that any relevant conversation with the two employees and Brady would be revealed by the imaging of their phones (which did occur) and the cloud of guilt which many have placed over Brady about the refusal loses any real relevance. Yet, the fact was leaked and the damage done.

Your alternative suggestion is entirely plausible. In which case the statement in the report regarding Brady being "...at least generally aware" of the activities of other Patriots employees just isn't supported.

TJMAC77SP

05-12-2015, 08:46 PM

Let's have a gut check for integrity................

How many of you were convinced of the guilt of Brady right after the charges were made in the press (the week following the AFC championship game)?

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 09:24 PM

No, actually 'more probably than not' is a term they placed into the investigation. It is an opinion which is not fully supported by facts uncovered by the investigation.

No, what they are doing is communicating the level of proof they have. Without knowing the people who did the investigation, but guess is they've had some sort of legal training and are using this term in a legal sense.

They do not have proof "beyond a reasonable doubt"...which is what is required in a criminal case.

Nor do they have "clear and convincing proof"...which is a middle standard that is required in some civil cases, such as child custody

What they do feel they have is "more likely than not"...which is the same as "preponderance of evidence"...which equates to tipping the scales in favor of him knowing...which is the standard of proof in most other civil cases.

There is little doubt for example that McNally and Jastremski altered the ball pressure. There is no doubt that Brady likes the balls inflated at the low end of the allowable spectrum and has harangued the two Patriots employees about that

Okay...we're on the same page so far.

but there is no evidence that he knowingly directed or allowed them to put the pressure below the allowable limit.

There is no smoking gun, that is not the same as "no evidence"...there is evidence that they were nervous about what they were doing...there is evidence that Tom did a lot of scrambling afterward...there is evidence that the equip. manager reassured Brady that the equipment director "knows it isn't realistic you did it yourself."

There is a lot of evidence that Brady knew of something fishy...no smoking gun, but plenty of evidence.

Weren't you a cop? Then you should know something about Circumstantial evidence...it is a type of evidence...it's not called circumstantial lack of evidence.

On at least one occasion Jastremski complained to McNally that the refs had altered the ball pressure to almost 16 psi. "I checked some of the balls this morn... The refsfucked us...a few of then were at almost 16". I can image that this would elicit some strong reaction from Brady. That is a very reasonable alternative explanation for the anger imtimated to by McNally and Jastremski.

I am not sure which texts and calls from Brady you are referring to because I have seen none that support that statement (or the conclusion of the investigators).

Jastremski (10:54 a.m.): FYI...Dave will be picking your brain later about it. He's not accusing me, or anyone...trying to get to bottom of it. He knows it's unrealistic you did it yourself...
Jastremski (10:55 a.m.): Just a heads up
Brady (10:59 a.m.): No worries bud. We are all good

__________________________________________________ ____

Brady (9:51 a.m.): You good Jonny boy?
Jastremski (9:53 a.m.): Still nervous; so far so good though. I'll be alright
Brady (9:54 a.m.): You didn't do anything wrong bud.
Jastremski (9:55 a.m.): I know; I'll be all good

One of the leaks which came out early was Brady's refusal to turn over his personal cell phone to the investigators. That was probably the smartest move made by anyone involved in this fiasco. Given who Brady is and who he is married to and the constant attention paid to every little thing in his life if I were him the last thing I would do is turn over my personal cell phone and it's contents (to include private texts and photos). The assurance of privacy given by the investigators was useless. Given the swiss cheese nature of this and past investigations I don't blame Brady for not turning the phone over. Add to that the fact that any relevant conversation with the two employees and Brady would be revealed by the imaging of their phones (which did occur) and the cloud of guilt which many have placed over Brady about the refusal loses any real relevance. Yet, the fact was leaked and the damage done.

I don't blame him for not turning over his phones, either...and that fact has nothing to do with my belief that he knew what was going on.

I think his lack of candor, can be used in his employers discipline decision though.

Your alternative suggestion is entirely plausible. In which case the statement in the report regarding Brady being "...at least generally aware" of the activities of other Patriots employees just isn't supported.

You're gonna believe what you wanna believe I guess.

What do you suppose Tom Brady knew this was stressing the guy out? What exactly would be stressful about properly inflating footballs?

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 09:32 PM

Let's have a gut check for integrity................

How many of you were convinced of the guilt of Brady right after the charges were made in the press (the week following the AFC championship game)?

When I first heard of it...I was actually surprised that each team provided their own balls.

After learning that, common sense told me that any and everything an equipment manager does to the ball happens is with the QBs approval and direction...had nothing to do with any competitive dislike I might have had for Brady...

Again...I found it plausible that Brady didn't know about limits and things like that...he just knew how he liked the ball....but the text messages convinced me, he was a bit more deliberate and knowing about it.

Individually, most of the messages can be explained away... when you look at hte whole, it's highly likely Brady knew what was up.

I no more disliked him than any other successful QB that's not on my team...well, except Manning, I like Petyon Manning a lot even though he's not on my team.

TJMAC77SP

05-12-2015, 09:56 PM

No, what they are doing is communicating the level of proof they have. Without knowing the people who did the investigation, but guess is they've had some sort of legal training and are using this term in a legal sense.

They do not have proof "beyond a reasonable doubt"...which is what is required in a criminal case.

Nor do they have "clear and convincing proof"...which is a middle standard that is required in some civil cases, such as child custody

What they do feel they have is "more likely than not"...which is the same as "preponderance of evidence"...which equates to tipping the scales in favor of him knowing...which is the standard of proof in most other civil cases.

Okay...we're on the same page so far.

There is no smoking gun, that is not the same as "no evidence"...there is evidence that they were nervous about what they were doing...there is evidence that Tom did a lot of scrambling afterward...there is evidence that the equip. manager reassured Brady that the equipment director "knows it isn't realistic you did it yourself."

There is a lot of evidence that Brady knew of something fishy...no smoking gun, but plenty of evidence.

Weren't you a cop? Then you should know something about Circumstantial evidence...it is a type of evidence...it's not called circumstantial lack of evidence.

Jastremski (10:54 a.m.): FYI...Dave will be picking your brain later about it. He's not accusing me, or anyone...trying to get to bottom of it. He knows it's unrealistic you did it yourself...
Jastremski (10:55 a.m.): Just a heads up
Brady (10:59 a.m.): No worries bud. We are all good

__________________________________________________ ____

Brady (9:51 a.m.): You good Jonny boy?
Jastremski (9:53 a.m.): Still nervous; so far so good though. I'll be alright
Brady (9:54 a.m.): You didn't do anything wrong bud.
Jastremski (9:55 a.m.): I know; I'll be all good

So your conclusion of those calls is that Brady knew exactly what the other two had been engaged in? I don't see that at all.

I am familiar with circumstantial evidence and know full well that if a reasonable and plausible explanation which refutes the evidence is presented much of that is discarded.

You're gonna believe what you wanna believe I guess.

What do you suppose Tom Brady knew this was stressing the guy out? What exactly would be stressful about properly inflating footballs?

I fully admit I am a Pats fan and want to believe that neither Brady nor Belichick condoned nor directed this behavior. As far as stressing these guys out...........picture that you are an employee down at the level of the food chain that these guys are and that someone of Brady's stature is constantly harping about the inflation level of the game balls he is provided. We know that on at least one occasion the refs had over inflated the balls way beyond the league's parameters. I think it reasonable to assume that it may have occurred more than once.

Brady is known as a perfectionist and takes his craft very seriously. In fact that is an understatement. When Bill Belichick describes you as the most serious man on the team, that is saying something.

Picture the level of stress that would put on you. There is nothing to suggest that isn't the case here. Nothing in those texts suggest that their guidance was to deflate the balls below the league's legal limit. Of course, were they to do so and Brady was happy with the feel of the ball, the stress would be reduced or eliminated wouldn't it.

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 10:07 PM

So your conclusion of those calls is that Brady knew exactly what the other two had been engaged in? I don't see that at all.

I am familiar with circumstantial evidence and know full well that if a reasonable and plausible explanation which refutes the evidence is presented much of that is discarded.

Again...when you take the totality of the evidence, it's plainly obvious.

I fully admit I am a Pats fan and want to believe that neither Brady nor Belichick condoned nor directed this behavior.

Okay, this is really the explanation why we are disagreeing here.

I get it...I'm a Tony Stewart fan.

As far as stressing these guys out...........picture that you are an employee down at the level of the food chain that these guys are and that someone of Brady's stature is constantly harping about the inflation level of the game balls he is provided.

C'mon man, even before the season started, the guy referred to himself as "the deflator"...what would that even mean in any other context.

A normal equipment manager does go around deflating balls...they inflate them. They only deflated them because air had to be taken OUT after they were inspected. If that wasn't the case, they would simply inflate them to where they wanted...

We know that on at least one occasion the refs had over inflated the balls way beyond the league's parameters. I think it reasonable to assume that it may have occurred more than once.

Possible...more like those guys were exaggerating as they did in many of their texts.

Brady is known as a perfectionist and takes his craft very seriously. In fact that is an understatement. When Bill Belichick describes you as the most serious man on the team, that is saying something.

I'll just say that in the interviews right after the story broke...when Belichick gave his explanation...it was completely 100% believable and I never doubted for a minute he was telling the truth.

Picture the level of stress that would put on you. There is nothing to suggest that isn't the case here. Nothing in those texts suggest that their guidance was to deflate the balls below the league's legal limit. Of course, were they to do so and Brady was happy with the feel of the ball, the stress would be reduced or eliminated wouldn't it.

Attorney Ted Wells angrily fired back at Tom Brady's agent after Don Yee made accusations Wells was biased and that his Deflategate investigation was a sting operation.
"The conclusions in the report represent the independent opinion of me personally and my team, and those conclusions were not influenced in any way, shape or form by anyone at the league office. We made a fair and reasonable review of the evidence and we reached conclusions based on the preponderance of the evidence standard, which I was required to apply, based on the league's rules," Wells said in a conference call Tuesday afternoon.
Wells' report, released last week after a months-long investigation, found that it was "more probable than not" that Brady, the New England Patriots quarterback, was likely aware of the actions of two low-level employees who were responsible for deflating balls used in January's AFC Championship Game.

Well, whattya know, turns out the guy is an attorny and was applying a legal standard of "preponderance of evidence" to find that it was "more probably than not"
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/9065941e142eb769bb76794c742e08d1e14ee558/r=300/http/www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/9065941e142eb769bb76794c742e08d1e14ee558/r=300/http/www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/36cefd3fa8f69614cd3b7341f2e18b703befec68/c=302-211-2922-2831/local/-/media/2015/05/11/USATODAY/USATODAY/635669689728143670-c01-2whip-12.jpg

Monday, the NFL suspended Brady for four games, docked the Patriots two draft picks, including a 2016 first rounder, and fined the organization $1 million.
Yee called the penalties "ridiculous" and said the "outcome was predetermined." He also accused Wells of having a conflict of interest because of previous legal work with the NFL. Wells' law firm has represented the NFL in the concussion lawsuits. And, last year, he led an investigation into the Miami Dolphins' bullying scandal.
Wells rarely speaks so openly — he didn't after the Dolphins investigation nor following most of his work with the league — and that he did so Tuesday in a 30-minute call orchestrated by the NFL office was a sign of just how much Yee's accusations had infuriated him.
"I think it is wrong to criticize my independence just because you disagree with my findings," Wells said, adding that neither Brady's camp nor the Patriots' criticized his appointment in January.
Wells further clarified several aspects of his investigation Tuesday, including the level to which the Patriots, and particularly Brady, cooperated.
Wells said the franchise was fully cooperative, aside from failing to make team employee Jim McNally available for a second interview. McNally was the second Patriots employee interviewed by Wells, and Wells said he found incriminating text messages from McNally, in which he referred to himself as "the deflator" and mentioned not "going to ESPN yet

I missed the part about 'going to ESPN'...wonder what he was going to do...go tell ESPN that Brady insists he legally inflate the footballs...wow, that'd been a great story.

Wells believed those text messages to be direct — and not circumstantial — evidence of the Patriots' and Brady's culpability. "What drove the decision on this report was one thing — the evidence.

Yeah, baby.

I could not ignore the import and the relevancy of the text messages and the other evidence," Wells said.
Wells said Brady cooperated when interviewed, but he wasn't forthcoming in providing digital evidence from his cell phone. Wells said he told Yee and Brady that the quarterback would not need to surrender his phone, nor would investigators look at any private information contained on it. He also said he told Yee he would allow the agent to find the relevant information and provide a printout, yet Yee refused.Again, refusing to turn over private communication isn't proof of anything...but, it's relevant for workplace discipline.

(http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/patriots/2015/05/11/tom-brady-suspended-four-games-first-round-pick-1m-fine-deflategate-new-england/26989751/)Wells said the Patriots specifically asked him to investigate a possible sting operation and find out if they were being set up, either by another team or the league. The Indianapolis Colts, New England's AFC title opponent, sent an e-mail to the NFL office shortly before the AFC Championship Game asking officials to be on the lookout for under-inflated footballs.
Wells said this complaint did not garner a strong reaction.
"What the facts find is the opposite. No one at the league office took it seriously," Wells said. "There was no sting, and that issue was addressed because the Patriots raised it."

sandsjames

05-12-2015, 10:24 PM

Brady (9:51 a.m.): You good Jonny boy?
Jastremski (9:53 a.m.): Still nervous; so far so good though. I'll be alright
Brady (9:54 a.m.): You didn't do anything wrong bud.
Jastremski (9:55 a.m.): I know; I'll be all good

This part of the conversation sure does look like they are saying that neither did anything wrong. Don't see anything that says "You won't get caught" or "they never figure out what we did" that would lead me to believe, legally, they did anything.

Of course I know they did, just as I know (as a 49er fan) that Rice put stick 'em on his gloves and (as an SF Giants fan) that Bonds juiced. Legally there is nothing, but knowing is different.

This is the part I agree with the most. Workplace has every right to do what they did. Of course, if the NFL wasn't under so much scrutiny the last couple years this never would have happened.

That's why I don't think it will hurt his reputation. Hell, if murderers can regain their reputation then somebody who "more probable than not knew something" won't have a problem.

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 10:37 PM

This part of the conversation sure does look like they are saying that neither did anything wrong. Don't see anything that says "You won't get caught" or "they never figure out what we did" that would lead me to believe, legally, they did anything.

Of course I know they did, just as I know (as a 49er fan) that Rice put stick 'em on his gloves and (as an SF Giants fan) that Bonds juiced. Legally there is nothing, but knowing is different.

Individually, each little bit of evidence can be isolated and you can come up with plausible explanations...

I think when you look at the totality of everything that happened...it's obvious to the most casual observer that they was something nefarious going on and that Brady knew about it.

Again...don't forget the part about the balls actually being below limits...and the video actually showing that guy going into the bathroom with them.

Bos Mutus

05-12-2015, 10:40 PM

This is the part I agree with the most. Workplace has every right to do what they did. Of course, if the NFL wasn't under so much scrutiny the last couple years this never would have happened.

That's why I don't think it will hurt his reputation. Hell, if murderers can regain their reputation then somebody who "more probable than not knew something" won't have a problem.

yes...and let's not forget what we're really talking about here....he's not going to jail and he's not being sued...he's suspended a month off work without pay.

I've seen Airmen get bigger relative fines for far less...only instead of not working they do extra duty in the meantime.

If anything...this probably helps Brady be fresher later in the season...as long a Jeanine Garafalo can keep them to 2-2 or so.

TJMAC77SP

05-12-2015, 11:50 PM

Again...when you take the totality of the evidence, it's plainly obvious.

Okay, this is really the explanation why we are disagreeing here.

I get it...I'm a Tony Stewart fan.

C'mon man, even before the season started, the guy referred to himself as "the deflator"...what would that even mean in any other context.

A normal equipment manager does go around deflating balls...they inflate them. They only deflated them because air had to be taken OUT after they were inspected. If that wasn't the case, they would simply inflate them to where they wanted...

Possible...more like those guys were exaggerating as they did in many of their texts.

I'll just say that in the interviews right after the story broke...when Belichick gave his explanation...it was completely 100% believable and I never doubted for a minute he was telling the truth.

You're gonna believe what you wanna believe.

No, actually as a trained investigator I know the difference between what I want to believe and what I do believe. When the scandal with Tiger Woods first broke I WANTED to believe it wasn't true. Before long I DID BELIEVE that the allegations were true. I didn't continue to defend him.

I am curious about this statement............

"A normal equipment manager does go around deflating balls...they inflate them. They only deflated them because air had to be taken OUT after they were inspected. If that wasn't the case, they would simply inflate them to where they wanted..."

Given that on at least one occasion they DID have to deflate balls because of ref action, why do you discount that they had to do that more than once?

Well, whattya know, turns out the guy is an attorny and was applying a legal standard of "preponderance of evidence" to find that it was "more probably than not"
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/9065941e142eb769bb76794c742e08d1e14ee558/r=300/http/www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/9065941e142eb769bb76794c742e08d1e14ee558/r=300/http/www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/36cefd3fa8f69614cd3b7341f2e18b703befec68/c=302-211-2922-2831/local/-/media/2015/05/11/USATODAY/USATODAY/635669689728143670-c01-2whip-12.jpg

I thought you knew Wells was an attorney. That is a fairly normal practice in corporate investigations. Of course the real leg work was most likely done by actual investigators.

I am curious why you think that a statement by the guy whose name is on the investigation defending that investigation in it's entirety is somehow an 'a hah' moment.

Here is another portion I find a bit curious and more curious, your willingness to dismiss it.......

"................ The Indianapolis Colts, New England's AFC title opponent, sent an e-mail to the NFL office shortly before the AFC Championship Game asking officials to be on the lookout for under-inflated footballs.
Wells said this complaint did not garner a strong reaction.
"What the facts find is the opposite. No one at the league office took it seriously," Wells said. "There was no sting, and that issue was addressed because the Patriots raised it."

So, before the game even started there was an email to the league from the Colts telling them to 'lookout' for under-inflated balls and then it is the Colts that raise the issue.

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't really believe there was a sting given that the Colts would have had to deflate several of the Patriot's balls but it seems it was dismissed before the game by the league and therefore dismissed ex post facto by the Wells team. Shoddy investigative practice. Follow all leads no matter how silly. Document everything or it didn't happen.

TJMAC77SP

05-12-2015, 11:59 PM

yes...and let's not forget what we're really talking about here....he's not going to jail and he's not being sued...he's suspended a month off work without pay.

I've seen Airmen get bigger relative fines for far less...only instead of not working they do extra duty in the meantime.

If anything...this probably helps Brady be fresher later in the season...as long a Jeanine Garafalo can keep them to 2-2 or so.

Come on that is very disingenuous. You know very well this is a hell of a lot more than missing "month off work without pay".

Bos Mutus

05-13-2015, 12:13 AM

No, actually as a trained investigator I know the difference between what I want to believe and what I do believe. When the scandal with Tiger Woods first broke I WANTED to believe it wasn't true. Before long I DID BELIEVE that the allegations were true. I didn't continue to defend him.

I am curious about this statement............

"A normal equipment manager does go around deflating balls...they inflate them. They only deflated them because air had to be taken OUT after they were inspected. If that wasn't the case, they would simply inflate them to where they wanted..."

Given that on at least one occasion they DID have to deflate balls because of ref action, why do you discount that they had to do that more than once?

Geez, dude...can you really not see that they were just throwing out a WAG, like "holy shit dude, these gotta be 16 pounds!" They didn't actually measure them?

...and I don't know what that's all about...the team has an controls the balls for weeks prior to the game.

My statement is not part of the evidence...just conjecture on my part...when you get a new football in, it doesn't have air..you inflate it. Yet, even in preseason this guys refers to himself as "the deflator"...and says he is "not going to ESPN...Yet"...what about the "eleven, or eleven and half"...you think that was just innocently his shoe size or do you think it was a reference to ball pressure like everyone else believes? a refwhat do you think he was hinting about there?

Again...it's easy to come up with plausible explanations when you look at any individual piece of evidence...but, when you look at the totality of it all, I think it's clear

You are a fan and aren't going to see it that way...I get it.

Now, you've really got me curious though...

1) Do you think the equipment managers did nothing wrong?

2) Do think they did something wrong, but not knowingly?

3)Do you think they knowingly broke the rules, but kept Tom Brady willfully ignorant of it and all those text messages and nervousness and going to ESPN is just a big misunderstanding?

No matter which of the three...there are some bits of evidence that make no sense in that scenario. If they kept Brady out of it...what's with all the activity afterword and his reassurance "Don't worry, man, you didn't do nothing wrong."... if Brady didn't know the more logical reaction would be "WTF dude? what's happening?"...more like Belichick's reaction.

Bos Mutus

05-13-2015, 12:24 AM

I thought you knew Wells was an attorney. That is a fairly normal practice in corporate investigations. Of course the real leg work was most likely done by actual investigators.

I didn't know he was an attorney..in an earlier post I guessed that he had legal training and his use of the term "more likely than not" was one of someone who had legal training, and that it means the same as "a preponderance of evidence"

...a point you and hustonj both disagreed with...you both seemed to feel that these are different...that "a preponderance of evidence" is a standard of evidence, while "more likely than not" is a statement of unsubstantiated opinion.

You are both wrong...the phrases mean the same thing...which is that based on the evidence...more of it leans toward the side of the claim.

I am curious why you think that a statement by the guy whose name is on the investigation defending that investigation in it's entirety is somehow an 'a hah' moment.

Not sure what statement you are referring to here.

Here is another portion I find a bit curious and more curious, your willingness to dismiss it.......

"................ The Indianapolis Colts, New England's AFC title opponent, sent an e-mail to the NFL office shortly before the AFC Championship Game asking officials to be on the lookout for under-inflated footballs.
Wells said this complaint did not garner a strong reaction.
"What the facts find is the opposite. No one at the league office took it seriously," Wells said. "There was no sting, and that issue was addressed because the Patriots raised it."

So, before the game even started there was an email to the league from the Colts telling them to 'lookout' for under-inflated balls and then it is the Colts that raise the issue.

I didn't really dismiss it...just not sure how important it was that the Colts, and apparently many others around the league have been suspicious of the Patriots balls for some time...but, they hadn't been able to prove it, but in this game, they wanted to league to be aware of the suspicion.

However, the league didn't do anything.

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't really believe there was a sting given that the Colts would have had to deflate several of the Patriot's balls but it seems it was dismissed before the game by the league and therefore dismissed ex post facto by the Wells team. Shoddy investigative practice. Follow all leads no matter how silly. Document everything or it didn't happen.

Quite the contrary...he speaks on it a bit. In fact, he followed up on it and criticizes the NFL front office for having cared little of the accusation beforehand.

Bos Mutus

05-13-2015, 12:37 AM

Come on that is very disingenuous. You know very well this is a hell of a lot more than missing "month off work without pay".

Really? It's not like they vacated the win or anything...suspended 4 early games next year...they'll be fine.

Oh...the equipment managers were suspended indefinitely without pay by the Patriots...do you think that was fair?

TJMAC77SP

05-13-2015, 03:17 AM

Really? It's not like they vacated the win or anything...suspended 4 early games next year...they'll be fine.

Funny how you can accept virtually every word in the Wells report but seem unable to see the long term ramifications to the legacy of arguably one of the games greatest quarterbacks.

Yes to your last question.

TJMAC77SP

05-13-2015, 03:27 AM

I didn't know he was an attorney..in an earlier post I guessed that he had legal training and his use of the term "more likely than not" was one of someone who had legal training, and that it means the same as "a preponderance of evidence"

...a point you and hustonj both disagreed with...you both seemed to feel that these are different...that "a preponderance of evidence" is a standard of evidence, while "more likely than not" is a statement of unsubstantiated opinion.

You are both wrong...the phrases mean the same thing...which is that based on the evidence...more of it leans toward the side of the claim.

Not sure what statement you are referring to here.

I didn't really dismiss it...just not sure how important it was that the Colts, and apparently many others around the league have been suspicious of the Patriots balls for some time...but, they hadn't been able to prove it, but in this game, they wanted to league to be aware of the suspicion.

However, the league didn't do anything.

Quite the contrary...he speaks on it a bit. In fact, he followed up on it and criticizes the NFL front office for having cared little of the accusation beforehand.

You are attributing a quote to me that isn't true. What I said about the weight of the evidence is..........

"I doubt this conclusion would be the same in a civil action either. There doesn't seem to be a preponderance of evidence that supports the allegations that it was "more probable than not"...that Brady..."was at least generally aware" of the activities of other Patriots employees"

In other words given only the actual evidence at hand, the opinion of Brady's part in the actions of the other two employees is not supported.

BTW: You should delete the citation from Harvard Law School. It applies to internal procedures involving students.

TJMAC77SP

05-13-2015, 03:29 AM

Not sure what statement you are referring to here.

Wells defense of the investigation. You quoted the thing, apparently in its entirety. You didn't understand that?

"............. a statement by the guy whose name is on the investigation defending that investigation........"

What? The remark referenced Brady...the second part was just an "oh, by the way, I wonder what you think about these guys"

Funny how you can accept virtually every word in the Wells report but seem unable to see the long term ramifications to the legacy of arguably one of the games greatest quarterbacks.

I don't have to accept every word in the report...the text messages and video evidence tell me enough to draw my own conclusion.

His legacy is what it is...he had a hand in this and denying it in order to preserve his legacy would be the epitome of disingenuous.

Yes to your last question.

Bos Mutus

05-13-2015, 03:42 AM

You are attributing a quote to me that isn't true. What I said about the weight of the evidence is..........

"I doubt this conclusion would be the same in a civil action either. There doesn't seem to be a preponderance of evidence that supports the allegations that it was "more probable than not"...that Brady..."was at least generally aware" of the activities of other Patriots employees"

In other words given only the actual evidence at hand, the opinion of Brady's part in the actions of the other two employees is not supported.

You said:

[QUOTE=TJMAC77SP;354414]No, actually 'more probably than not' is a term they placed into the investigation. It is an opinion which is not fully supported by facts uncovered by the investigation.

What I was trying to illustrate to you and hustonj was that "more probably than not" is an actual legal term that means the evidence leans more toward him having knowledge of this...it is the standard that is used in most civil cases, as well.

So...your statements seemed to indicate that you and hustonj were thinking that "preponderance of evidence" is the standard is civil cases, but this case wouldn't meet that and was "more probable than not" meaning you both felt it was more of an opinion.

It's not.

BTW: You should delete the citation from Harvard Law School. It applies to internal procedures involving students.

What is so difficult about this? It is an illustration that "more likely than not" and "more probably than not" and "preponderance of evidence" are standards of evidence...that mean the same thing...whether that standard is applied in civil cases, in NFL internal policy or in Harvard Law School internal procedures...they mean the same thing. Especially considering that the author of this report was an attorney with legal training.

Bos Mutus

05-13-2015, 03:48 AM

Wells defense of the investigation. You quoted the thing, apparently in its entirety. You didn't understand that?

"............. a statement by the guy whose name is on the investigation defending that investigation........"

Okay...misunderstood what you were saying....thought you were referencing one specific statement within.

I think I already answered the questions as to why what the author of the report meant when he wrote the report is relevant and how he explained some of the evidence.

I think it also shed some light on the guy to hear him as an independent investigator answer to the obviously not independent Brady representative.

...kind of similar to what we have going on here. Brady is your hero, you don't want his legacy tarnished.

sandsjames

05-13-2015, 11:00 AM

My problem with the entire thing is that this punishment is much more severe than punishments for the exact same thing in the past with other teams. San Diego had the same issue a while back. I think they got a $40k fine, at most (can't remember exact amount).

TJMAC77SP

05-13-2015, 02:20 PM

Okay...misunderstood what you were saying....thought you were referencing one specific statement within.

I think I already answered the questions as to why what the author of the report meant when he wrote the report is relevant and how he explained some of the evidence.

I think it also shed some light on the guy to hear him as an independent investigator answer to the obviously not independent Brady representative.

...kind of similar to what we have going on here. Brady is your hero, you don't want his legacy tarnished.

He is hardly my hero. I am a Pats fan, not fanatic. I grew up in Boston.......I root for the local teams......I couldn't name more than four players on each of the teams and less on the Celtics and Bruins. (I guess like my Christian status that makes me a bad fan).

I don't want to see his legacy tarnished over this report. I wouldn't want anyone's reputation (with regard to what the report says about Brady) tarnished based on the contents of this investigation.

My point on Wells' comments was a simple truth. Now Wells' integrity is at stake, of course he is going to defend the report. Citing him doesn't exactly add any nails to the coffin of the argument

Absinthe Anecdote

05-13-2015, 03:50 PM

He is hardly my hero. I am a Pats fan, not fanatic. I grew up in Boston.......I root for the local teams......I couldn't name more than four players on each of the teams and less on the Celtics and Bruins. (I guess like my Christian status that makes me a bad fan).

I don't want to see his legacy tarnished over this report. I wouldn't want anyone's reputation (with regard to what the report says about Brady) tarnished based on the contents of this investigation.

My point on Wells' comments was a simple truth. Now Wells' integrity is at stake, of course he is going to defend the report. Citing him doesn't exactly add any nails to the coffin of the argument

After saying that you grew up in Boston and are a Pats fan, you don't have much credibility when you try to pretend that you aren't a Brady "fan boy."

sandsjames

05-13-2015, 04:15 PM

After saying that you grew up in Boston and are a Pats fan, you don't have much credibility when you try to pretend that you aren't a Brady "fan boy."

So which QB poster do you have on your wall? I mean, if you're a football fan at all you must spend some alone time in the shower after watching a game, right?

Bos Mutus

05-13-2015, 04:41 PM

He is hardly my hero. I am a Pats fan, not fanatic. I grew up in Boston.......I root for the local teams......I couldn't name more than four players on each of the teams and less on the Celtics and Bruins. (I guess like my Christian status that makes me a bad fan).

Okay...it was my best guess as to why you so readily dismiss the evidence against him

I don't want to see his legacy tarnished over this report. I wouldn't want anyone's reputation (with regard to what the report says about Brady) tarnished based on the contents of this investigation.

The investigators job was to be independent and determine whether or not the scale of evidence tips toward Brady having knowledge of this. I think he did that and I agree with him.

What this does to his legacy is not the fault of the investigator...

My point on Wells' comments was a simple truth. Now Wells' integrity is at stake, of course he is going to defend the report. Citing him doesn't exactly add any nails to the coffin of the argument

No, it doesn't...the main point of that was first, to show that he was an attorney and was using "more probably than not" in a legal sense...which means the same as "preponderance of the evidence"...

Secondly, because that article showed some of the text messages and other evidence...regardless of his take on it, I think the evidence alone shows Brady's involvement is "more likely than not"

Based on everything we've seen is it possible that Brady didn't know rules we're being broken? Slim possibility, maybe...not likely. Again, the standard of proof is more likely than not. It isn't proof beyond any shadow of possibility.

I think we've both seen or read about a good portion of the evidence, I think it shows Brady had some involvement, you don't think it does. I don't think we'll get past that fact unless Brady comes clean in his interview tomorrow.

Absinthe Anecdote

05-13-2015, 04:43 PM

So which QB poster do you have on your wall? I mean, if you're a football fan at all you must spend some alone time in the shower after watching a game, right?

You have a poster on the wall of your shower? What kind of tape do you use?

To do that right would be a lot of effort. You'd need a waterproof frame and adhesive that isn't water-soluble.

Plus, most showers are rather small, so a big poster wouldn't make much sense because you wouldn't be able to focus on it.

You'd need to be at least five feet away from a standard poster to view it properly.

I don't see you making enough scratch teaching tech-school kids how to put gas in light-all carts to afford a big palatial bathroom.

Are you telling fibs again?

sandsjames

05-13-2015, 04:49 PM

You have a poster on the wall of your shower? What kind of tape do you use?

To do that right would be a lot of effort. You'd need a waterproof frame and adhesive that isn't water-soluble.

Plus, most showers are rather small, so a big poster wouldn't make much sense because you wouldn't be able to focus on it.

You'd need to be at least five feet away from a standard poster to view it properly.

I don't see you making enough scratch teaching tech-school kids how to put gas in light-all carts to afford a big palatial bathroom.

Are you telling fibs again?

What a weak response, with a very good attempt at avoiding answering why he MUST be a fan-boy blindly following his teams QB while the same criteria doesn't apply to you.

And your attempts to belittle my job/career field are weak, as well. You couldn't carry my tool bag.

Absinthe Anecdote

05-13-2015, 04:59 PM

What a weak response, with a very good attempt at avoiding answering why he MUST be a fan-boy blindly following his teams QB while the same criteria doesn't apply to you.

And your attempts to belittle my job/career field are weak, as well. You couldn't carry my tool bag.

You are the one who took the conversation into weird-ville with the off-topic masturbation reference, not me.

Now you want to be haughty because I lampooned your dumbass comment about jerking off in the shower?

sandsjames

05-13-2015, 05:41 PM

You are the one who took the conversation into weird-ville with the off-topic masturbation reference, not me.

Now you want to be haughty because I lampooned your dumbass comment about jerking off in the shower?

Was just pointing out how ridiculous your fan-boy comment was.

Max Power

05-13-2015, 05:55 PM

I like what Conan O'Brien had to say about it in his monologue the other night, "The NFL has suspended Tom Brady for four games over Deflategate. They’re going to punish him by making him stay home in his mansion with his supermodel wife and think about what he did wrong."

Mjölnir

05-13-2015, 07:10 PM

I like what Conan O'Brien had to say about it in his monologue the other night, "The NFL has suspended Tom Brady for four games over Deflategate. They’re going to punish him by making him stay home in his mansion with his supermodel wife and think about what he did wrong."

After saying that you grew up in Boston and are a Pats fan, you don't have much credibility when you try to pretend that you aren't a Brady "fan boy."

I am a fan but it's been a long time since was an anything 'boy'

TJMAC77SP

05-14-2015, 01:06 AM

Okay...it was my best guess as to why you so readily dismiss the evidence against him

The investigators job was to be independent and determine whether or not the scale of evidence tips toward Brady having knowledge of this. I think he did that and I agree with him.

What this does to his legacy is not the fault of the investigator...

No, it doesn't...the main point of that was first, to show that he was an attorney and was using "more probably than not" in a legal sense...which means the same as "preponderance of the evidence"...

Secondly, because that article showed some of the text messages and other evidence...regardless of his take on it, I think the evidence alone shows Brady's involvement is "more likely than not"

Based on everything we've seen is it possible that Brady didn't know rules we're being broken? Slim possibility, maybe...not likely. Again, the standard of proof is more likely than not. It isn't proof beyond any shadow of possibility.

I think we've both seen or read about a good portion of the evidence, I think it shows Brady had some involvement, you don't think it does. I don't think we'll get past that fact unless Brady comes clean in his interview tomorrow.

I have authored and reviewed hundreds of investigations. I conduct and report on them for a living to this date. I personally would never put an opinioned assumption like that in the portion of an investigation which was being released to the public. If the formal report has to be released then perhaps a non-attributable verbal executive brief at which I give my opinion, caveated with what I can prove and what I can't. Perhaps my standard and the standard I was taught is higher. If so, as I said in the very beginning of this thread, you better hope you never are on the receiving end of a report of that caliber.

BTW: I do think Brady had some involvement but as equally plausible as what has been stated, it could merely a very-high powered sports figure putting pressure on very low ranking employees of the franchise. Everything they have intimated and stated could be entirely true but by writing the report in the fashion they did Brady's actions, both real and intimated have been tied to the actions of the other two as if it were a unit of three. This is the major flaw I saw.

TJMAC77SP

05-14-2015, 01:10 AM

Was just pointing out how ridiculous your fan-boy comment was.

I took it as AA kidding around.

Bos Mutus

05-14-2015, 01:46 AM

I have authored and reviewed hundreds of investigations. I conduct and report on them for a living to this date. I personally would never put an opinioned assumption like that in the portion of an investigation which was being released to the public.

I'm pretty sure he was hired to investigate and make a determination, (judgement, opinion....whatever you wanna call it)

If the formal report has to be released then perhaps a non-attributable verbal executive brief at which I give my opinion, caveated with what I can prove and what I can't. Perhaps my standard and the standard I was taught is higher.

perhaps you investigate just to gather evidence and aren't being hired to make a judgement as well.

If so, as I said in the very beginning of this thread, you better hope you never are on the receiving end of a report of that caliber.

BTW: I do think Brady had some involvement but as equally plausible as what has been stated, it could merely a very-high powered sports figure putting pressure on very low ranking employees of the franchise. Everything they have intimated and stated could be entirely true but by writing the report in the fashion they did Brady's actions, both real and intimated have been tied to the actions of the other two as if it were a unit of three. This is the major flaw I saw.

I disagree with your assessment. I think your alternate explanation is possible, but not likely...given the totality of the evidence.

Mjölnir

05-14-2015, 02:03 AM

"More probable than not" is another way of saying "preponderance of the evidence"...both mean about the same...51% chance he knew of this. That is the standard for civil court, as well.

Same as NJP too.

Common sense, really. There is no way those guys mess with footballs without the quarterback knowing about it.

Is it possible that he just sort of shows them how he likes it, not knowing it is below the legal limit? Yes, I suppose so...but his text messages and phone calls kind of put the suspicion over the top.

Maybe, don't know for sure but that is plausible.

This isn't like cheating in a high school game, the NFL is a multi-million dollar enterprise that depends on integrity.

Part of me agrees with you; I am not a big sports guy so for the most part I am kind of thinking "BFD", but I get the point that this is a multi-million (billion?) dollar enterprise and that something that influences the outcome of a game could cost a team (and consequently the city & businesses for those teams) money it becomes more important. Brett Favre gave a good talk this AM about it:

"I don't think by any stretch, in my opinion, that Tom was cheating," Favre said. "I don't know if Tom can honestly say he has completed more passes because of it. I think more than anything, it helped with the grip based on conditions. And would other players do it? Sure, I have no reason to think otherwise."

From a personal perspective I understand that we are talking about conduct on the field vice conduct off the field; but find it a little ironic that the NFL was more harsh on the guy that 'probably' knew about letting air out of the game balls than the guy who knocked a woman unconscious (Ray Rice); or on the field a guy who purposely & after the play is dead purposely tries to hurt another player (Ndamukong Suh.)

Bos Mutus

05-14-2015, 02:14 AM

From a personal perspective I understand that we are talking about conduct on the field vice conduct off the field; but find it a little ironic that the NFL was more harsh on the guy that 'probably' knew about letting air out of the game balls than the guy who knocked a woman unconscious (Ray Rice); or on the field a guy who purposely & after the play is dead purposely tries to hurt another player (Ndamukong Suh.)

...and way more harsh than all on a guy who got carried away disciplining his kid.

i think the difference in these cases is it doesn't threaten the integrity of the game, which is the NFL's primary purview...let's look at Pete Rose.

rice and Peterson have to deal with court as the primary.....but I also think the nfl and everybody else knows they screwed the pooch on rice

Mjölnir

05-14-2015, 02:21 AM

...and way more harsh than all on a guy who got carried away disciplining his kid.

i think the difference in these cases is it doesn't threaten the integrity of the game, which is the NFL's primary purview...let's look at Pete Rose.

rice and Peterson have to deal with court as the primary.....but I also think the nfl and everybody else knows they screwed the pooch on rice

Yeah, I also kind of look at it like "just because you have the ability to play in our league, doesn't mean we have to to let you."

The thing that bothers me about Suh (which was on the field activity) is that he could have really hurt the Green Bay quarterback he stepped on. Potentially ending his season or worst case his career. Maybe not an 'integrity of the game' issue; but that could have had a HUGE impact on the Packers.

Bos Mutus

05-14-2015, 02:26 AM

Yeah, I also kind of look at it like "just because you have the ability to play in our league, doesn't mean we have to to let you."

The thing that bothers me about Suh (which was on the field activity) is that he could have really hurt the Green Bay quarterback he stepped on. Potentially ending his season or worst case his career. Maybe not an 'integrity of the game' issue; but that could have had a HUGE impact on the Packers.

Suh is an ass...not the first he's done something like that either.

sandsjames

05-14-2015, 10:55 AM

Same as NJP too.

Maybe, don't know for sure but that is plausible.

Part of me agrees with you; I am not a big sports guy so for the most part I am kind of thinking "BFD", but I get the point that this is a multi-million (billion?) dollar enterprise and that something that influences the outcome of a game could cost a team (and consequently the city & businesses for those teams) money it becomes more important. Brett Favre gave a good talk this AM about it:

From a personal perspective I understand that we are talking about conduct on the field vice conduct off the field; but find it a little ironic that the NFL was more harsh on the guy that 'probably' knew about letting air out of the game balls than the guy who knocked a woman unconscious (Ray Rice); or on the field a guy who purposely & after the play is dead purposely tries to hurt another player (Ndamukong Suh.)

I am almost reluctant to bring this up...but a point was made today on ESPNs show "PTI" that this punishment was as serious as it was partially because Tom Brady is a white "golden" boy. If the punishment was too weak then the Commish would have had some 'splainin' to do.

This is far less serious than Rice knocking out his girlfriend and more serious than Peterson taking his kid behind the woodshed.

sandsjames

05-14-2015, 10:59 AM

Suh is an ass...not the first he's done something like that either.Will never understand why Suh always seems to receive a pass. Sure, he gets disciplined, but then it's as if nothing happened. He's like the guy who shows up to work late everyday and never gets more than an LOC.

Bos Mutus

05-14-2015, 03:50 PM

I am almost reluctant to bring this up...but a point was made today on ESPNs show "PTI" that this punishment was as serious as it was partially because Tom Brady is a white "golden" boy.

What I can't figure out is why everyone thinks a 4-game suspension is "so serious."

sandsjames

05-14-2015, 03:56 PM

What I can't figure out is why everyone thinks a 4-game suspension is "so serious."

The biggest complaint I've heard isn't about the suspension itself. It's about the $1 million fine (in addition to the loss of several draft picks) that is, by far, the largest of it's kind for something like this. As I mentioned previously, San Diego did a similar thing awhile back and was fined (around) $40k.

No biggy on the suspension, though, as I'm sure that will get knocked down to 1 or 2 games.

Bos Mutus

05-14-2015, 05:46 PM

The biggest complaint I've heard isn't about the suspension itself. It's about the $1 million fine (in addition to the loss of several draft picks) that is, by far, the largest of it's kind for something like this.

Okay, but those are team penalties...not Brady penalties. The $1M I think is pretty meaningless in that context...the draft picks is the most severe thing about all of this...

As I mentioned previously, San Diego did a similar thing awhile back and was fined (around) $40k.

NFL definitely has a consistency problem.

No biggy on the suspension, though, as I'm sure that will get knocked down to 1 or 2 games.

I'm guessing so too...has even filed an appeal yet? Not sure what the time fram on that is.

sandsjames

05-14-2015, 06:02 PM

Okay, but those are team penalties...not Brady penalties. The $1M I think is pretty meaningless in that context...the draft picks is the most severe thing about all of this... Meaningless in the overall scheme, I suppose. Just as it's meaningless if one QB earns 120 million and the other one earns 110 million. However, it's more of a status thing than a dollar figure thing and it relates to the consistency problem you mention.

I'm guessing so too...has even filed an appeal yet? Not sure what the time fram on that is.I think it has to be soon. From what I understand is that if he wants to appeal he will have to turn over phone records (or some evidence refuting the claim) and the phone records are what kept him from cooperating in the first place. I'm sure, at his age, he really wouldn't mind having a 12 game regular season.